đŸ’„Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • Explained: Shreya Singhal case that struck down Section 66A of IT Act

    Six years after it struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Supreme Court earlier this month termed its continued use by law enforcement agencies of various states as “a shocking state of affairs” and sought a response from the Centre.

    What did Section 66A do?

    • Introduced in 2008, the amendment to the IT Act, 2000, gave the government power to arrest and imprison an individual for allegedly “offensive and menacing” online posts, and was passed without discussion in Parliament.
    • Section 66A empowered police to make arrests over what policemen, in terms of their subjective discretion, could construe as “offensive” or “menacing” or for the purposes of causing annoyance, inconvenience, etc.
    • It prescribed the punishment for sending messages through a computer or any other communication device like a mobile phone or a tablet, and a conviction could fetch a maximum of three years in jail.
    • In 2015, the apex court struck down the law in the landmark case Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, calling it “open-ended and unconstitutionally vague”, and thus expanded the contours of free speech to the Internet.

    Why was the law criticized?

    • The problem was with the vagueness about what is “offensive”.
    • The word having a very wide connotation was open to distinctive, varied interpretations.
    • It was seen as subjective, and what might have been innocuous for one person, could lead to a complaint from someone else and, consequently, an arrest arbitrarily.

    So, how did 66A come under the Supreme Court’s scrutiny?

    • The first petition came up in the court following the arrest of two girls in Maharashtra by Thane Police in November 2012 over a Facebook post.
    • The girls had made comments on the shutdown of Mumbai for the funeral of a political leader.
    • The arrests triggered outrage from all quarters over the manner in which the cyber law was used.
    • The petition was filed by Shreya Singhal, then a 21-year-old law student.

    What were the grounds for the challenge?

    • The objective behind the 2008 amendment was to prevent the misuse of information technology, particularly through social media.
    • The petitioners argued that Section 66A came with extremely wide parameters, which allowed whimsical interpretations by law enforcement agencies.
    • Most of the terms used in the section had not been specifically defined under the Act.
    • The law was a potential tool to gag legitimate free speech online and to curtail freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under the Constitution, going far beyond the ambit of “reasonable restrictions” on that freedom.

    What did the Supreme Court decide?

    • In March 2015, a bench of Justices J. Chelameswar and R.F. Nariman ruled in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India declared Section 66A unconstitutional for “being violative of Article 19(1)(a) and not saved under Article 19(2).”
    • Article 19(1)(a) gives people the right to speech and expression whereas 19(2) accords the state the power to impose “reasonable restrictions” on the exercise of this right.
    • The decision was considered a landmark judicial pushback against state encroachment on the freedom of speech and expression.
    • The bench also read down Section 79– now at the centre of the ongoing “intermediary liability” battle between the Centre and micro-blogging platform Twitter– defining key rules for the relationship between governments and commercial internet platforms.
    • Section 79 says that any intermediary shall not be held legally or otherwise liable for any third party information, data, or communication link made available or hosted on its platform.

  • Interference an investigating officer can do without

    Context

    Instances of judiciary directing the investigating officer point to the need for restraint from the judiciary.

    Challenging the discretion of investigating officer

    • There have been growing instances of subordinate judicial officers, and even High Courts sometimes, directing the investigating officer to effect the arrest of a particular individual.
    • To deal with the issue, the Supreme Court of India recently made the observation that courts have no authority to direct an investigating officer to in turn direct the arrest of any particular individual connected with a crime
    • This points to the need for a slightly kindlier view of police conduct and more latitude to them in the standard operating procedures which they follow, especially when they investigate a complicated crime.
    • The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) vests sufficient discretion in the investigating officer to take such decisions as arrests and searches.

    Issues with court’s directions

    • Court observations that smack of a lack of faith in police ability and integrity will make grass-root level policemen even more arbitrary than now and force them into carrying out questionable actions that will cast aspersions on an officer’s ability to think for himself.
    • Court interference in the day-to-day investigation is not only undesirable but is also not sanctioned by law.
    • Only the Supreme Court, has been vested with enormous authority and discretion by the Constitution, the lesser courts shall not give directions in the matter of arrests and searches.

    Safeguard against police misconduct

    • We need to educate the Executive and the common man that it is now well-established law that the police have to register an FIR.
    • It is mandatory that every police station in the land should register a complaint under the relevant sections of a statute the moment a cognisable offence is made out in the complaint
    • There is another safeguard against police misconduct.
    • The CrPC makes it obligatory for the investigating officer to write a diary that details the action taken every day following registration.
    • When in doubt, the competent court, which already has a copy of the first information report, can demand to see the case diary.
    • Courts should remember that the police are a well-established hierarchy that is obligated to ensure objectivity during a criminal investigation.
    • Every investigation is supervised by at least two immediate senior officers.

    Conclusion

    Judicial interference in an investigation is counterproductive to the idea of justice. Therefore, there is a need for allowing more freedom to the investigating officers in the standard operating procedure that they follow.

  • Addressing claims of backwardness by various politically powerful castes

    Context

    Two rulings of the Supreme Court have frayed nerves in Maharashtra on the broader question of “reservation”. The other pertains to OBC reservation in local bodies. Both issues have relevance beyond Maharashtra.

    Challenges in addressing the demand for reservation

    • Lack of quantitative data: The issue of actual numbers or population share of OBCs has been talked about for over a decade.
    • Besides, there is a need to understand the socio-economic situation of different backward communities.
    • In the last instance, we have to decide which groups are backward and what needs to be done for them.
    • The political class have consistently avoided the juridical reality.

    Consensus between judiciary and political class

    • That consensus after implementation of Mandal commission recommendation had three dimensions:
    • 1) Accepting that caste is the main cause of tradition-born backwardness among a large section of the population.
    • 2) Resorting to “reservation” as the easiest policy response.
    • 3) Recognising and accommodating the political aspirations of the backward sections by expanding the social base of the political elite.
    • But this resulted in the current deadlock on the question of social justice.
    • Today, not only the Marathas, but Jats and Patidars, too, claim that vast numbers among them have been left behind in the contemporary economy.
    • These demands have deflected attention from two matters.
    • 1) That the enabling provision of the Constitution aims at social backwardness (caused by societal location).
    • 2) That the causes of economic distress originating in development policies are distinct from backwardness primarily originating in caste location.
    • Granting reservations on an economic basis seems to have complicated matters.

    Five reservation-related issues gaining renewed urgency

    • Intra-OBC differentiations: This issue was already raised by a member of the Mandal Commission itself.
    • Most states have failed to come up with an effective arrangement to addressing the issue.
    • The Centre is currently waiting for a report on this question.
    • Intra-caste stratification: Intra-caste stratification is increasing — something that was rather limited at the time of Mandal.
    • What sociologist D L Sheth called as classification is now becoming the central issue, with many complications.
    • Advantages and logic: The third question is about the specific advantages and logic of reservation in the three different arenas of employment, education and political representation.
    • Limits of reservation: There is need to discuss the limits of reservation and the need to think of additional measures to augment the policy of social justice.
    • Setting boundaries: With such widespread poverty and suffering, how do we distinguish between backwardness primarily caused by a group’s social location in traditional social order and backwardness resulting from distortions of the political economy?
    • Unless we grapple with this question, reservation is bound to remain a contentious issue.

    Way forward

    • The above questions are best left ideally to a third backward classes commission whose time has come.
    • Removing the 50 per cent cap legislatively needs to be considered.

    Conclusion

    We need to devise a mechanism to verify the claims of backwardness to address the increasing demands for reservation from the politically strong section of society.

  • Sedition Law and its discontents

    The CJI is now convinced that sedition law (IPC 124A) is being misused by the authorities to trample upon citizens’ fundamental rights of free speech and liberty.

    What does Section 124A of the IPC say?

    • The section deals with the offence of sedition, a term that covers speech or writing, or any form of visible representation, which brings the government into hatred or contempt, or excites disaffection towards the government, or attempts to do so.
    • It is punishable with three years in prison or a life term.
    • “Disaffection”, it says, includes disloyalty and feelings of enmity.
    • However, it also says expressing disapproval of government measures or actions, with a view to getting them changed by lawful means, without promoting hatred or disaffection or contempt towards the government will not come under this section.

    What is its origin?

    • Colonial past: Sedition was introduced in the penal code in 1870, a decade after the Indian Penal Code came into force.
    • It was a colonial law directed against strong criticism of the British administration.
    • Putting curb on Freedom fighters: Its most famous victims included Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi.
    • Gandhi called it “the prince among the political sections of the IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen”.

    Is it constitutionally valid?

    • Violative of FRs: Two high courts had found it unconstitutional after Independence, as it violated the freedom of speech and expression.
    • Reasonable restrictions: The Constitution was amended to include ‘public order’ as one of the ‘reasonable restrictions’ on which free speech could be abridged by law.
    • Kedar Nath Case: Thereafter, the Supreme Court, in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962) upheld its validity.
    • At the same time, it limited its application to acts that involve “intention or tendency to create disorder” or incitement to violence.
    • Thus, even strongly worded remarks, as long as they do not excite disloyalty and enmity, or incite violence, are not an offence under this section.

    Why the controversy now?

    • Frequent use: In recent times, the resort to this section is seen as disturbingly frequent.
    • Curbing dissent: Activists, cartoonists and intellectuals have been arrested under this section, drawing criticism from liberals that it is being used to suppress dissent and silence critics.
    • Misuse for propaganda: Authorities and the police who invoke this section defend the measure as a necessary step to prevent public disorder and anti-national activities.
    • Irrelevance: Many of them have also been detained under the National Security Act and UAPA.

    What is being debated about it?

    • Liberals and rights activists have been demanding the scrapping of Section 124A.
    • It is argued that the provision is “overbroad”, i.e., it defines the offence in wide terms threatening the liberty of citizens.
    • The Law Commission has also called for a reconsideration of the section.
    • It has pointed that Britain abolished it more than a decade ago and raised the question of whether a provision introduced by the British to put down the freedom struggle should continue to be law in India.
    • Some argue that a presumption of constitutionality does not apply to pre-constitutional laws as those laws have been made by foreign legislature or bodies.

    What has the apex court observed?

    • Justice D.Y. Chandrachud had flagged the indiscriminate use of the sedition law against people who aired their grievances about the government’s COVID management.
    • People have been charged even for seeking help to gain medical access, equipment, drugs and oxygen cylinders, especially during the second wave of the pandemic.
    • Justice U.U. Lalit, in his recent judgment, quashed a sedition case against a person for his alleged remarks about the PM and the Union Government.

    Way forward

    • The time is long past when the mere criticism of governments was sufficient to constitute sedition.
    • The right to utter honest and reasonable criticism is a source of strength to a community rather than a weakness, the CJI has recorded.

    Try answering this PYQ:

    Q.With reference to Rowlatt Satyagraha, which of the following statements is/are correct?

    1. The Rowlatt Act was based on the recommendations of the ‘Sedition Committee’.
    2. In Rowlatt Satyagraha, Gandhiji tried to utilize the Home Rule League.
    3. Demonstrations against the arrival of Simon Commission coincided with Rowlatt Satyagraha.

    Select the correct answer using the code given below:

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 1 and 2 only

    (c) 2 and 3 only

    (d) 1, 2 and 3

  • What is Adjournment Motion?

    Ahead of the Monsoon session of Parliament, a political party from Punjab has decided to move an adjournment motion in the Lok Sabha against the government on the three controversial farm laws.

    Revise all the devices of parliamentary proceedings from your Polity Book.

    Recalling the three laws

    1. Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020
    2. Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020
    3. Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020

    [Burning Issue] Agricultural Reform Bills, 2020

    What is Adjournment Motion?

    • Adjournment motion is aimed to draw the attention of the House to a recent matter of urgent public importance having serious consequences.
    • The matter proposed to be raised should be of such a character that something very grave which affects the whole country and its security has happened.
    • The House is required to pay its attention immediately by interrupting the normal business of the House.
    • It can introduce only in the Lok Sabha.
    • It involves an element of censure against the government, therefore Rajya Sabha is not permitted to make use of this device.
    • In the event of an adjournment motion being adopted, the House automatically stands adjourned.

    How it is held?

    • It is regarded as an extraordinary device as it interrupts the normal business of the House.
    • It needs the support of 50 members to be admitted.
    • The notice of an adjournment motion is required to be given on the prescribed form.
    • A member can give not more than one notice for any one sitting.
    • The discussion on this motion should last for not less than two hours and thirty minutes.

    Restrictions to the motion

    The right to move a motion for an adjournment of the business of the House is subject to the following restrictions. It should:

    • Not raise a question of privilege.
    • Not revive discussion on a matter that has been discussed in the same session.
    • Not deal with any matter that is under adjudication of court.
    • Not raise any question that can be raised on a distinct motion.

    Answer this PYQ in the comment box:

    Q.The Parliament of India exercises control over the functions of the Council of Ministers through:

    1. Adjournment motion
    2. Question hour
    3. Supplementary questions

    Select the correct answer using the code given below: (CSP 2017)

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 and 3 only

    (c) 1 and 3 only

    (d) 2 and 3 only

  • [pib] Commission for Sub-categorization within OBCs gets another extension

    The Union Cabinet has approved of the term of the Commission constituted under Article 340 of the Constitution to examine the issue of Sub-categorization within Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the Central List.

    What is the Sub-categorization of OBCs?

    • OBCs are granted 27% reservation in jobs and education under the central government.
    • In September 20202, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court reopened the legal debate on the sub-categorization of SCs and STs for reservations.
    • The debate arises out of the perception that only a few affluent communities among over 2,600 included in the Central List of OBCs have secured a major part of this 27% reservation.

    Need for sub-categorization

    • The argument for sub-categorization — or creating categories within OBCs for reservation — is that it would ensure “equitable distribution” of representation among all OBC communities.
    • To examine this, the Rohini Commission was constituted on October 2, 2017.
    • At that time, it was given 12 weeks to submit its report but has been given several extensions since, the latest one being the 10th.
    • Before the Rohini Commission was set up, the Centre had granted constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC).

    Why so many extensions are being given?

    • In process of preparing the sub-categorized central list of OBCs, the Commission has noted several ambiguities in the list as it stands now.
    • The Commission is of the opinion that these have to be clarified/rectified before the sub-categorised central list is prepared.
    • A hurdle for the Commission has been the absence of data for the population of various communities to compare with their representation in jobs and admissions.
    • Many groups of OBCs have been demanding enumeration of OBCs in the Census.

    Back2Basics: Article 340

    • Article 340 of the Indian Constitution lays down conditions for the appointment of a Commission to investigate the conditions of the backward classes.
    • The President may by order appoint a Commission consisting of such persons as he thinks fit to investigate the conditions of socially and educationally backward classes within the territory of India.

  • [pib] Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary

    The Union Cabinet has approved the continuation of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for the Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary. It also approved the decision to support the Gram Nyayalayas by proving recurring and non-recurring grants for a period of 5 years with a total outlay of Rs 50 crores.

    About the Scheme

    • A Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary has been in operation since 1993-94.
    • Adequacy of judicial infrastructure is critical for the reduction of pendency and backlog of cases in Courts.
    • The primary responsibility of infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary rests with the State Governments.
    • The present proposal provides for additional activities like the construction of lawyer halls, toilets complexes and digital computer rooms.
    • This will add to the convenience of lawyers and litigants besides reducing the digital divide.

    Why such a move?

    • Adequacy of judicial infrastructure is critical for the reduction of pendency and backlog of cases in Courts.
    • Several courts are still functioning in rented premises with insufficient space and some in dilapidated conditions without basic amenities.
    • Well-equipped judicial infrastructure facilitates the administration of justice in a manner that allows easy access and timely delivery of justice to all.

    What is Gram Nyayalayas Scheme?

    • Gram Nyayalayas were established for speedy and easy access to the justice system in the rural areas across the country.
    • The Gram Nyayalayas Act came into force on October 2, 2009.
    • In terms of Section 3(1) of the Act, it is for the State Governments to establish Gram Nyayalayas in consultation with the respective High Courts.
    • The Act authorizes Gram Nyayalaya to hold a mobile court outside its headquarters.
    • Some major reasons behind the non-enforcement include financial constraints, the reluctance of lawyers, police and other government officials.

    Features of the Gram Nyayalayas

    • Gram Nyayalaya is established generally at headquarter of every Panchayat at the intermediate level or a group of contiguous panchayat in a district where there is no panchayat at an intermediate level.
    • The Gram Nyayalayas are presided over by a Nyayadhikari, who will have the same power, enjoy the same salary and benefits of a Judicial Magistrate of First Class.
    • Such Nyayadhikari is to be appointed by the State Government in consultation with the respective High Court.

    Jurisdiction

    • A Gram Nyayalaya have jurisdiction over an area specified by a notification by the State Government in consultation with the respective High Court.
    • The Court can function as a mobile court at any place within the jurisdiction of such Gram Nyayalaya, after giving wide publicity to that regard.
    • The Gram Nyayalayas have both civil and criminal jurisdiction over the offences and nature of suits specified in the First, Second and Third schedule of the Act.
    • The pecuniary jurisdiction of the Nyayalayas are fixed by the respective High Courts.
    • Appeals in criminal matter can be made to the Sessions Court in the respective jurisdiction and in civil matters to the District Court within a period of one month from the date of judgment.

    Trials

    • Gram Nyayalayas can follow special procedures in civil matters, in a manner it deem just and reasonable in the interest of justice.
    • Civil suits are proceeded on a day-to-day basis, with limited adjournments and are to be disposed of within a period of six months from the date of institution of the suit.
    • In execution of a decree, the Court can allow special procedures following rules of natural justice.
    • Gram Nyayalayas allow for conciliation of the dispute and settlement of the same in the first instance.
    • They have been given the power to accept certain evidence which would otherwise not be acceptable under the Indian Evidence Act.

  • The upcoming challenges to Indian federalism

    Context

    In 2026, there will be the challenge of addressing the conflict between the democratic principles and the federal principles, when there will be a reallocation of Lok Sabha seats. India needs to reimagine the current federal compact to address the challenges to federalism.

    Population freeze for Lok Sabha seats

    • Since 1976, seats in the Lok Sabha have reflected the 1971 census and have not taken into account changes in the population.
    • The primary reason for this has been unequal population growth among States.
    • India’s most highly developed and prosperous States have been successful at family planning, while the poorer States continue to expand.
    • The freeze was thus a chance to ensure that India’s most successful States are not punished politically for their success.
    • Therefore, the Indian Constitution may face an unprecedented crisis in 2026 when there will be a dramatic change in the composition of the Lok Sabha.

    Challenge of balancing the principle of democracy and federalism

    • As Article 1 of the Indian Constitution says, India is a Union of States.
    • However, the history of the linguistic reorganisation of States in 1956, and subsequent movements for Statehood afterwards demonstrates that States are distinct associative communities, within the federal structure of the Indian Union.
    • In a democratic set-up, all citizens are equal and are thus entitled to equal representation in governance.
    • But this would imply that bigger States are likely to dominate the national conversation over smaller States.
    • This leads us to an inherent contradiction between the principles of democracy and federalism when federal units are unequal in size, population and economics. 
    • The small States fear that they would get a smaller share of the pie economically, a much reduced say in national issues, and be irrelevant in the political governance of the country.

    How the US Constitution addresses the concerns of small states

    • When the Americans adopted their Constitution, they protected smaller States in four ways.
    • First, national powers over the States were limited.
    • Second, each State regardless of size had two seats in the Senate, giving smaller States an outsized role in national governance.
    • Third, Presidents are elected by electoral votes, which means they must win States rather than the total national population.
    • Fourth, the slave-owning states were allowed to count the slaves for purposes of representation, with each slave being counted as three-fifths of a person.
    • This essential structure remains the bedrock of the American Constitution today.

    How Indian Constitution deals with the issue?

    • India’s quasi-federal structure has always been sui generis.
    • Our founders knew that India’s diversity made federalism inevitable, but, fearing separatist tendencies among States that had never been a single political unit, they also created a strong centre.
    • However, the 1956 reorganisation of States on linguistic lines was a popular recognition of federal principles and yet did not result in separatist tendencies.
    • Since then, new States within the Union have been created in response to the demands of people for greater autonomy.

    Way forward on addressing the challenges to federalism

    • There is an urgent need to reimagine our national compact.
    • Following are the components of such a new balance that need to be fine-tuned to Indian realities.
    • Give more powers to States: The powers of States vis-Ă -vis the Centre contained in the Lists and in the provisions dealing with altering boundaries of States must be increased to assuage the fear of smaller States that they will be dominated by bigger ones.
    • More localised decision-making is bound to increase national prosperity.
    • Indeed, this was the entire goal of the creation of Panchayat governance through the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution.
    • Expand the role of Rajya Sabha: The role and composition of the Rajya Sabha, our House of States, must be expanded.
    • This would allow smaller States a kind of brake over national majoritarian politics that adversely impact them.
    • Consent of all states on financial redistribution: Constitutional change and the change in financial redistribution between the States must require the consent of all or nearly all States.
    • Constitutional provisions dealing with language and religion must also be inviolate.
    • Break the bigger States: Serious thought must be given to breaking up the biggest States into smaller units that will not by themselves dominate the national conversation.

    Conclusion

    The unity of India is, of course, the fundamental premise underlying this discussion; but this unity does not depend on an overbearing Centre for its survival.

  • Kongu Nadu region of Tamil Nadu

    A list of new Union Cabinet ministers issued has triggered a debate in political circles in Tamil Nadu, as well as on social media, by referring to ‘Kongu Nadu’, the informal name for a region in the western part of the state.

    Where is Kongu Nadu?

    • ‘Kongu Nadu’ is neither a place with a PIN code nor a name given formally to any region.
    • It is a commonly used name for part of western Tamil Nadu.
    • In Tamil literature, it was referred to as one of the five regions of ancient Tamil Nadu.
    • There were mentions of ‘Kongu Nadu’ in Sangam literature as a separate territory.
    • The name derives from Kongu Vellala Gounder, an OBC community with a significant presence in these districts.
    • The region includes prominent businesses and industrial hubs at Namakkal, Salem, Tirupur and Coimbatore.

    Is there any ground for the allegations about a planned bifurcation?

    • Unlike Telangana or Uttarakhand, there has never been demand or discussions about a separate Kongu Nadu in the modern political history of Tamil Nadu.
    • The debate, therefore, lacks any political or social context.

    Back2Basics: Sangam Age

    • The ‘Sangam’ describes a period from the sixth century BC to the third century AD encompassing today’s Tamil Nadu, Kerala, the southern parts of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, and northern Sri Lanka.
    • The Tamil Sangams or Cankams were assemblies of Tamil scholars and poets that, according to traditional Tamil accounts, occurred in the remote past.
    • It is named for scholarly congregations in and around the city of Madurai, located about 400 km southwest of Chennai.
    • It generally refers to a collection of poems, composed by Tamil poets, both men and women developed in the ancient Southern state of India.
    • It mostly deals with emotional and material topics such as love, war, governance, trade and bereavement.

  • Election of Speaker and Deputy Speaker

    The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly has been without a Speaker for most of this year.

    Election of Speakers

    • The Constitution specifies offices like those of the President, Vice President, Chief Justice of India, and Comptroller and Auditor General of India, as well as Speakers and Deputy Speakers.
    • Article 93 for Lok Sabha and Article 178 for state Assemblies state that these Houses “shall, as soon as may be”, choose two of its members to be Speaker and Deputy Speaker.
    • In Lok Sabha and state legislatures, the President/Governor sets a date for the election of the Speaker.
    • It is the Speaker who decides the date for the election of the Deputy Speaker.
    • The legislators of the respective Houses vote to elect one among themselves to these offices.
    • The Constitution provides that the office of the Speaker should never be empty.
    • So, he/she continues in office until the beginning of the next House, except in the event of death or resignation.

    Ruling party or Opposition?

    • Usually, the Speaker comes from the ruling party.
    • In the case of the Deputy Speaker of Lok Sabha, the position has varied over the years.
    • Until the fourth Lok Sabha, the Congress held both the Speaker and Deputy Speakers positions.
    • In the fifth Lok Sabha, whose term was extended due to the Emergency, an independent member, Shri G G Swell, was elected the Deputy Speaker.
    • The tradition for the post of the Deputy Speaker going to the Opposition party started during the term of Prime Minister Morarji Desai’s government.
    • The first time the Deputy Speaker’s position went to the opposition was during the term of Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao.

    Their roles

    • According to the book Practice and Procedure of Parliament, published by the Lok Sabha Secretariat, the Speaker is “the principal spokesman of the House, he represents its collective voice and is its sole representative to the outside world”.
    • The Speaker presides over the House proceedings and joint sittings of the two Houses of Parliament.
    • It is the Speaker’s decision that determines whether a Bill is a Money Bill and therefore outside of the purview of the other House.
    • The Deputy Speaker is independent of the Speaker, not subordinate to him, as both are elected from among the members of the House.

    Why need Dy Speaker?

    • The Deputy Speaker ensures the continuity of the Speakers office by acting as the Speaker when the office becomes vacant.
    • In addition, when a resolution for removal of the Speaker is up for discussion, the Constitution specifies that the Deputy Speaker presides over the proceedings of the House.

    Issue over time limit for election

    • The Constitution neither sets a time limit nor specifies the process for these elections.
    • It leaves it to the legislatures to decide how to hold these elections.
    • Haryana and Uttar Pradesh specify a time frame for holding the election to the Speaker and Deputy Speaker’s offices.
    • In Haryana, the election of the Speaker has to take place as soon as possible after the election.
    • Uttar Pradesh has a 15-day limit for an election to the Speaker’s post if it falls vacant during the term of the Assembly.

    Answer this PYQ in the comment box:

    Q.Consider the following statements:

    1. The Speakers of the Legislative Assembly shall vacate his/her office if he/she ceases to be a member of the Assembly
    2. Whenever the legislative assembly is dissolved, the speaker shall vacate his/her office immediately.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (CSP 2013)

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2